Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
Context windowHow much information the model can work with in one request, measured in tokens — pieces of words or other data. This includes your question, attachments, conversation and reply. Limits can vary by model variant and provider. | 1M | 8k |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | — | $30.00 |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | — | $60.00 |
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | $1.25Meta | $30.00Azure |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $4.25Meta | $60.00Azure |
| $463Meta | $9,000OpenAI list price | |
| These models have no shared benchmark scores. | ||
BullshitBench v2Nonsense detection — Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 50% | — |
ProgramBenchProgram reconstruction — The AI receives a working program and its documentation, then builds a replacement from scratch without the original source code, internet access or decompilation. The score is the percentage of 200 programs that pass every behavioral test. We record each model's best published mini-SWE-agent result, including higher reasoning efforts where available. Partial test-pass rates and almost-solved programs do not count toward this score. Equal scores share a rank here; the official board also uses partial progress to break ties. Higher is better. | 0% | — |
DeepSWE 1.1Agentic coding — Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. (Version 1.1 of the test.) Higher is better. | 59.3% | — |
HumanEvalFunction synthesis — 164 small Python problems: the AI is given a function's description and has to write the working function. This was the coding benchmark of the GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 era, before the field moved to fixing real bugs in real repositories. Higher is better. | — | 67% |
Terminal-Bench 2.1Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | 82.9% | — |
MMLUGeneral knowledge — A 57-subject multiple-choice exam — history, law, medicine, maths — that was the standard measure of how much a model knows from 2020 until roughly 2024, when frontier scores crowded into the high 80s and labs moved on to harder tests. The scores here were published years apart under different testing setups, so read them as a historical record rather than a like-for-like ranking. Higher is better. | — | 86.4% |
GSM8KGrade-school math — Grade-school maths word problems that take a few steps of arithmetic to work through. It separated the models of 2022 and 2023 sharply, then saturated. One caveat on the historical numbers: OpenAI included part of the GSM8K training set in GPT-4's pre-training mix, so GPT-4's score is not a clean few-shot result. Higher is better. | — | 92% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Meta | OpenAI |
| Release date | Aug 5 2026 | Mar 14 2023 |
| Access | Closed | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Muse Spark 1.2vsClaude Haiku 5.5GPT-4vsClaude Haiku 5.5Muse Spark 1.2vsGemini 4 CarbonGPT-4vsGemini 4 CarbonMuse Spark 1.2vsGrok 4.7GPT-4vsGrok 4.7Muse Spark 1.2vsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017GPT-4vsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Muse Spark 1.2vsMistral Large 4GPT-4vsMistral Large 4Muse Spark 1.2vsKimi K3.1 ProGPT-4vsKimi K3.1 ProFrequently asked questions
Muse Spark 1.2 and GPT-4 don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. Only GPT-4 has a verified first-party price for an available API: $30.00 per million input tokens and $60.00 per million output tokens. No currently available pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for Muse Spark 1.2. GPT-4 shipped 1240 days before Muse Spark 1.2, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Context windows are 1M (Muse Spark 1.2) vs 8k (GPT-4).
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — Muse Spark 1.2 and GPT-4 don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.